a systematic review and meta-analysis

抄録

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are considered primary drugs for the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI), and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are used when ACEIs cannot be tolerated. However, it is unclear whether ACEIs or ARBs are more appropriate first-line drugs in hypertensive patients with MI or heart failure (HF). The present study aimed to compare the effects of ACEIs and those of ARBs in these patients. Sixty randomized controlled trails (RCTs) that compared the effects of ACEIs and ARBs in patients with MI or HF were extracted by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and the Medical Central Journal database according to the PRISMA guidelines. We finally selected six eligible RCTs and identified three systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The proportion of hypertensive patients ranged from 36 to 69%. Meta-analyses were performed for recurrence or new onset of MI (risk ratio 0.97 [95% confidence interval: 0.88, 1.06]), hospitalization for HF (0.98 [0.84, 1.14]), cardiovascular or total mortality (0.98 [0.91, 1.05]), cardiovascular events or stroke (1.02 [0.94, 1.11]), and adverse events (1.40 [1.11, 1.77]). There were no significant differences between ACEIs and ARBs for all outcomes, except adverse events. Study discontinuation owing to adverse events was significantly more common with ACEIs than with ARBs. Among hypertensive patients with MI or HF, it appears desirable to select the most appropriate drugs, ACEIs or ARBs, in each case by considering the function level, patient background, comorbidity presence, blood pressure target, drug price and other such factors comprehensively in addition to considering tolerability.

abstract = "Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are considered primary drugs for the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI), and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are used when ACEIs cannot be tolerated. However, it is unclear whether ACEIs or ARBs are more appropriate first-line drugs in hypertensive patients with MI or heart failure (HF). The present study aimed to compare the effects of ACEIs and those of ARBs in these patients. Sixty randomized controlled trails (RCTs) that compared the effects of ACEIs and ARBs in patients with MI or HF were extracted by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and the Medical Central Journal database according to the PRISMA guidelines. We finally selected six eligible RCTs and identified three systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The proportion of hypertensive patients ranged from 36 to 69{\%}. Meta-analyses were performed for recurrence or new onset of MI (risk ratio 0.97 [95{\%} confidence interval: 0.88, 1.06]), hospitalization for HF (0.98 [0.84, 1.14]), cardiovascular or total mortality (0.98 [0.91, 1.05]), cardiovascular events or stroke (1.02 [0.94, 1.11]), and adverse events (1.40 [1.11, 1.77]). There were no significant differences between ACEIs and ARBs for all outcomes, except adverse events. Study discontinuation owing to adverse events was significantly more common with ACEIs than with ARBs. Among hypertensive patients with MI or HF, it appears desirable to select the most appropriate drugs, ACEIs or ARBs, in each case by considering the function level, patient background, comorbidity presence, blood pressure target, drug price and other such factors comprehensively in addition to considering tolerability.",

N2 - Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are considered primary drugs for the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI), and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are used when ACEIs cannot be tolerated. However, it is unclear whether ACEIs or ARBs are more appropriate first-line drugs in hypertensive patients with MI or heart failure (HF). The present study aimed to compare the effects of ACEIs and those of ARBs in these patients. Sixty randomized controlled trails (RCTs) that compared the effects of ACEIs and ARBs in patients with MI or HF were extracted by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and the Medical Central Journal database according to the PRISMA guidelines. We finally selected six eligible RCTs and identified three systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The proportion of hypertensive patients ranged from 36 to 69%. Meta-analyses were performed for recurrence or new onset of MI (risk ratio 0.97 [95% confidence interval: 0.88, 1.06]), hospitalization for HF (0.98 [0.84, 1.14]), cardiovascular or total mortality (0.98 [0.91, 1.05]), cardiovascular events or stroke (1.02 [0.94, 1.11]), and adverse events (1.40 [1.11, 1.77]). There were no significant differences between ACEIs and ARBs for all outcomes, except adverse events. Study discontinuation owing to adverse events was significantly more common with ACEIs than with ARBs. Among hypertensive patients with MI or HF, it appears desirable to select the most appropriate drugs, ACEIs or ARBs, in each case by considering the function level, patient background, comorbidity presence, blood pressure target, drug price and other such factors comprehensively in addition to considering tolerability.

AB - Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are considered primary drugs for the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI), and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are used when ACEIs cannot be tolerated. However, it is unclear whether ACEIs or ARBs are more appropriate first-line drugs in hypertensive patients with MI or heart failure (HF). The present study aimed to compare the effects of ACEIs and those of ARBs in these patients. Sixty randomized controlled trails (RCTs) that compared the effects of ACEIs and ARBs in patients with MI or HF were extracted by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and the Medical Central Journal database according to the PRISMA guidelines. We finally selected six eligible RCTs and identified three systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The proportion of hypertensive patients ranged from 36 to 69%. Meta-analyses were performed for recurrence or new onset of MI (risk ratio 0.97 [95% confidence interval: 0.88, 1.06]), hospitalization for HF (0.98 [0.84, 1.14]), cardiovascular or total mortality (0.98 [0.91, 1.05]), cardiovascular events or stroke (1.02 [0.94, 1.11]), and adverse events (1.40 [1.11, 1.77]). There were no significant differences between ACEIs and ARBs for all outcomes, except adverse events. Study discontinuation owing to adverse events was significantly more common with ACEIs than with ARBs. Among hypertensive patients with MI or HF, it appears desirable to select the most appropriate drugs, ACEIs or ARBs, in each case by considering the function level, patient background, comorbidity presence, blood pressure target, drug price and other such factors comprehensively in addition to considering tolerability.